Hi all,
I was wondering if the current data is correct. Even the https://www.geni.com/projects/Ancestors-of-Charlemagne/4914 project shows the ancestry of Charlemagne and St Arnoul has no direct known ancestors (he's the eaerliest known ancestor of Charlemagne). This is confirmed in the MP description. I wonder why St Arnoul has 1288 ancestors now (going to ancient Roman times). I've seen that it was recently updated by Carl Gustav Verbraeken; perhaps there is a reason for that? If that's incorrect, can we delete the link as per the MP description?
Best wishes,
K.
Hi Carl,
Thanks for reaching out. I still think that the evidence is circumstancial, even the links your provided don't necessary confirm that (Wikibin states that Arnulf was "supposedly" son of Bodegisel). To be honest, I don't think we could treat these sources as decisive. That's only something to consider. I always had a knowledge that St. Arnulf was the earliest known ancestor of Charlemagne, so it's new to me.
Best,
K.
Hi Karol,
Of course there is a valuable tradition to consider St.Arnulf as the oldest ancestor of Charlemagne. We know that further ancestry is not equally sure, ‘proven’ or even ‘known’. But given the huge amount of research that has been done on this topic in the last 20 years (even by great researchers like C. Settipani), we are coming to a feeling that we cannot set aside this forever. Time will tell, and the progress of historical research is secured.
Thanks for your understanding and wishing you much research pleasure!
Carl Gustav Verbraeken.
I think we should take this to a Curator only thread, Carl Gustav Verbraeken as I'm a little fuming.
What happened here is happening all over Geni more research, access to more information and more people involved brings new formerly unknown information.
That said however proof or souces still needed.
Presenting information in duscussions as Sharon Doubell has taught me the best way to start sharing new improved or different information.